Philosophers constantly warn that if we forget the past we are doomed to repeat it. I used to believe that we hadn’t learned a thing from Prohibition since we repeated that same warped piece of legislation with pot. I was wrong. Actually, pot began to be banned in many countries in the 1600’s. By the 1930’s all states were controlling the substance and federal legislation formalized the ban as part of the Controlled Substance Act of 1970. Pot was then officially in the same category as heroin and opium. Prohibition was repealed and booze now flows like water, while pot continues as a Schedule One drug. Why?

Both campaigns focused on a social problem. But people with addictive personalities are going to abuse anything that fills that gaping hole in their psyche. It is a question of treatment, not incarceration. By forcing pot underground, the lawmakers simply played into the hands of the eternal law of the playground; if it’s banned, it must be fun. My early experimentation with alcohol and nicotine were based entirely on such a premise. Back when booze was banned a new type of criminal was born and money immediately began to undermine the very courts that enforced the ban. Judges and police were bought and manipulated like tokens on a Monopoly board. Today alcohol is back as a staple in our culture and I doubt that few of us do not know a friend, family member or acquaintance whose life has been destroyed by alcohol. Whole grassroots organizations have cropped up to keep drunks off the roads and our loved ones safe. I don’t believe pot has that kind of grip on our society.

I have a tremendous amount of respect for our various law enforcement departments, still, the keyword is “law.” I tried alcohol and nicotine because it was a ban that was not really enforced. After my Navy exposure to pot I believed “it’s against the law so stay away from it.” Now I think we need to study the effects banned substances have on society. Politicians ushered in Prohibition for a specific reason; profit. While consuming a couple of highballs, a friend sneered about the evils of pot. Knowing I’m a Grateful Dead fan, the same friend stopped me in the parking lot to ask if I had any good stuff (pot). Reefer Madness, one of the most ridiculous movies of all time, is still the drug default for many but my most dangerous music situation was at a Jimmy Buffett show where the cowboy fans were swilling Jack Daniels and looking for a fight. Pot causes just the opposite reaction. Too often people without experience lump marijuana in with nasty drugs like PCP, Meth, E. and etc. Pot simply does not give that kind of jacked-up effect.

The requirements for a Schedule One drug are: high potential for abuse, no medical benefits, and not safe to use without medical supervision. I’ve stated my view on abusive personalities but when I look at pot as a form of medicine questions bubble up like an artisan well. How do doctors supervise the legal narcotics that they prescribe now? Unless you are hooked up to a I.V. they can’t monitor your drug consumption. I’ve heard of addicts having a dozen doctors writing prescriptions for bogus ailments. That is not the medical profession’s fault, it’s a loophole that needs to be closed. A joint, in comparison to those pills, is like sipping a cocktail yet it needs supervision when we can’t manage our opiates? As for medicine I’ve known AIDS patients and senior citizens who suffer from chronic pain sufferers who will attest to the attributes of a little bud. Smoking is temporary relief but ingested in baked goods it helps with insomnia as well. Marijuana also increases the sick’s appetite. And, unlike the loons in Reefer Madness, they will also tell you that pot doesn’t make them want to go rampaging through the streets or rob the nearest convenience store.

Why, then, is pot illegal? Why are our prisons full of drug “offenders” instead of our treatment rooms? What does “Gateway Drug” really mean? We hear a lot about our need to shrink Big Government but a large portion of our country is more than happy to allow the government to spend vast sums of money to eradicate this plant. The figure I keep hearing is $500 billion but the ACLU puts the cost of the War On Drugs at one trillion. Many of those incarcerated are simple pot users or growers and a serious look needs to be given to those who get jailed and those who do not. Dick Gregory, a black activist/comedian, put it best in the 60’s when he said, in paraphrase, “Any black nine year old can buy heroin on any corner in Harlem but the government says we don’t have a drug problem. We will only have a drug problem when white kids in the suburbs get hooked on drugs.” Are we there yet?

There’s hope, even if in a roundabout way. In a 7-2 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that “social sharing of a small amount of marijuana” does not constitute an “aggravated felony” under our immigration laws. The case of Moncrieffe v. Holder is an example of how our government views pot. Earlier rulings were overturned and Moncrieffe’s holding a small amount of pot wasn’t grounds for his deportation which was governments real goal with Moncrieffe, a 30 year green card holder from Jamaica. Others haven’t been so lucky; Americans with two prior drug-related felonies face a mandatory life sentence if convicted of a third strike. In the 60’s “abusers” of pot were given life sentences for possession of a single seed. With drunk drivers massacring innocents every day of the week, doesn’t this strike you as a bit harsh? Or are the motives really swimming below the surface like a great white shark?

There are other benefits to legalizing pot. Mexican drug cartels are just the Supply end of our free market paradigm; the U.S. functions as the Demand. With pot legalized the cartels would have no incentive to grow in our national parks and forests, and even on private property, protecting their investments with assault rifles. Despoiling of our environment with grow products (see the recent “Going To Pot” Sacramento Bee article) would abruptly end. Pot would be controlled by the marketplace just as alcohol is now and there would not be obscene, illegal profits to be had. Taxes could be gleaned from harvests that are the number one cash crop in many parts of our state and Northwest. Would there be abusers? Of course, but rehab didn’t become part of our national lexicon, and in places like Hollywood even part of the chic lifestyle of the rich and famous, because of pot. Abuse of alcohol is more pervasive. If the only response to “Why is pot bad?” is that it is illegal then we can take the “il-” out of the equation with our collective vote.

I know I ask a lot of questions. One answer I will venture is that Big Pharma, the manufacturers of pharmaceuticals and their high-paid lobbyists, want to keep us terrified of pot. They’d rather we rely on their pills and will finance national campaigns to downplay the medicinal value of marijuana. Why should we continue to line the pockets of criminals just because drug manufacturers want to keep a monopoly on painkillers? Oops, I had to get one last question in, didn’t I?

Jerry Tuck is a retired San Andreas resident and an indie author. Contact him at olwhofan@aol.com or use the Contact Form.